police and relatives and ex girlfriend conspired to frame Jeremy

[Caroline R]

I wonder - if he failed the test, would the 'relevant questions' be pondered or simply accepted?

[susan]

Morning Caroline  Accepted

[Caroline R]

Morning Caroline  Accepted

Thanks Susan - it's snowing here too by the way, I just know there will be no bread left in the Spar

[susan]

Hi Caroline  snow stopped just now but the surrounding mountains are covered and look fabulous.  My other half went out last week and bought 18 large loaves of bread and 30 tins of soup.  You may well laugh said he to I but you will be grateful when we are snowed in Poor wee soul

[tonyb]

I am sorry but it would seem there is no conclusive evidence that JB is innocent, and the same applies to the standard of evidence which implies he is guilty

  Sorry please explain where did I state there is conclusive evidence that he did do it

 yes. i think the same can be said of my post.It seems to have got lost in translation somewhat.
Beaufoy states the standard of evidence used to convict was inconclusive, lookout questions where the conclusive proof of guilt is, (it would seem to me the post has been mis-interperated) and i state "Perhaps the conclusive evidence is more accurately described as conclusive evidence he was found guilty of doing it?"
this was intended as correcting (as i saw it) lookouts incorrect interperatation of the initial post, insofar as to actually point to the fact the evidence before the court at the original trial was very poor. JB seems to me,to be inside because of poor representation.

now Beaufoy's post,to get back on track.
What Proof is there he is Innocent?
its to easy to say JMs deal, burn marks, ittemised billing, none of these would prove innocence. JB has not got to be proved Not Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that time has long gone. he's got to prove his innocence and that,IMHO, wont happen.

[Lugg]

yes. i think the same can be said of my post.It seems to have got lost in translation somewhat.
Beaufoy states the standard of evidence used to convict was inconclusive, lookout questions where the conclusive proof of guilt is, (it would seem to me the post has been mis-interperated) and i state "Perhaps the conclusive evidence is more accurately described as conclusive evidence he was found guilty of doing it?"
this was intended as correcting (as i saw it) lookouts incorrect interperatation of the initial post, insofar as to actually point to the fact the evidence before the court at the original trial was very poor. JB seems to me,to be inside because of poor representation.

now Beaufoy's post,to get back on track.
What Proof is there he is Innocent?
its to easy to say JMs deal, burn marks, ittemised billing, none of these would prove innocence. JB has not got to be proved Not Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that time has long gone. he's got to prove his innocence and that,IMHO, wont happen.

It's snowing......Oops! sorry. Back on track now.

[HMEssex]

Hello You  :D

Which 3 would be most relevant do you think?   


·     Did you shoot your family on August 7th 1985? – No
·     Did you shoot five members of your family with an Anshutz rifle? No
·     Were you present inside the house when they were shot with an Anshutz rifle? No
·     Did you shoot your father Neville? – No
·     Did you shoot your mother June? – No
·     Did you shoot your sister Sheila Caffell? – No
·     Did you shoot your twin nephews Daniel and Nicholas? – No
·     Did you climb out of a window of your parent’s home after shooting your family?  No
·     Did you shoot your family in your father’s home? – No
·    Did PC Bews radio in a report of seeing someone in an upstairs window around 4am on the morning of the shootings? – Yes·   
  Did you pay a professional hit man to shoot your family? – No

What about this one? 

[Patti]

What about this one? 

Oh yes! But in court it was the trick of the light....in a bedroom that had the light on, but Bew's said it was in darkness....Not according Mildenhall, he says it was on in his statement.   

[Lugg]

I wonder - if he failed the test, would the 'relevant questions' be pondered or simply accepted?

Oh we would be reminded every day no doubt by the antis?

[Lugg]

Oh yes! But in court it was the trick of the light....in a bedroom that had the light on, but Bew's said it was in darkness....Not according Mildenhall, he says it was on in his statement.   

That's why (according to Jeremy of course so it never happened cos he's a flamin' liar) Bews pissed his pants, ran as fast as he could to the radio car and called for armed back-up. Which made him a laughing stock among other members of the force.

[HMEssex]

Oh yes! But in court it was the trick of the light....in a bedroom that had the light on, but Bew's said it was in darkness....Not according Mildenhall, he says it was on in his statement.   

I'm sure it's been said before, but I wonder what would happen if Bews took a lie detector test?

[Lugg]

I'm sure it's been said before, but I wonder what would happen if Bews took a lie detector test?

Get away. He'd probably break it.